Eric Holder: Many "Low-Level, Nonviolent Drug Offenders" Will No Longer Face Mandatory Minimums

I see this as political PR at the moment, nothing more. When/If laws actually change, I will believe it. With the USA being the world's biggest jailer, it will be tough for those folks who own and run such establishments to take the financial hit. Especially in an age where employment is questionable on a daily basis, unemployment is at an all time high. and budgets are hurting all over.

My opinion- it would be nice to see the police enforcement units concentrating on violent offenses, like rape, murder and the like. Chasing after teenagers out to have a little fun creates a scene like the Keystone Kops in my mind.

Thanks OP for posting this. Very timely and good news, even if only for a moment or 2.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


yes. It is a vicious circle for sure. And there maybe another agenda. But the fact is if you take it at face value, Then he is right and it needs to be changed. I would think by putting it out there and getting public opinion, That would help the laws get changed. Society still rules you know?

Originally posted by Mikeyy
The drug cartel murders hundreds of thousands of people

The drug cartel has thousands and thousands of sex slaves

The drug cartel smuggles your weed across the border

You buy this weed, and act like you are a peaceful person who hasnt hurt anybody, when you just funded countless slaughterings in South America.

you have a point and one I mention to others

Originally posted by Mikeyy
The drug cartel murders hundreds of thousands of people

The drug cartel has thousands and thousands of sex slaves

The drug cartel smuggles your weed across the border

You buy this weed, and act like you are a peaceful person who hasnt hurt anybody, when you just funded countless slaughterings in South America.

Total BS. Most of that unmentionable plant that is consumed in the US is grown in the US. When you post something like this it tells me either you are an agent of the alphabet spewing propaganda or you are a brainwashed sheep.

The only reason the cartels have so much money and power is because of the draconian laws.

The only reason coc aine consumption has gone done in recent years is because of the rise of the Rx pain killers. Many addicts are turning to pain pills instead of coke and crack and big pharma loves it.

While our legal system needs to look at addiction as a medical problem not a legal one, the only ones who benefits from potheads in prison are those who control the Prison Industrial Complex and rehab is pointless for someone who likes to self medicate via a non-toxic plant that has been used since ancient times.

Eric Holder is a criminal based on FAST AND FURIOUS and should be on trial.

Eric Holder: Many "Low-Level, Nonviolent Drug Offenders" Will No Longer Face Mandatory Minimums

Well of course it's a PR stunt and a political ploy. It also happens to be brilliant on the part of the Democrats.

Now they just solidified the youth vote with something the younger folks deeply care about. This will be a huge political issue and talking point in the coming elections. Looks like the GOP will wind up losers once again unless they can come up with a platform other than demonizing Obama.

reply to post by Mikeyy


wait what? you do realize that home grown drugs are a huge industry in the usa why you think pot is not decriminlized in ca the emerald triangle thats why.

on topic of op this is good make more room in our overcrowded prisons for real criminals like rapists and murderers people who do not harm any one by their use should be left alone or at least not put in jail for what at worst amounts to a medical issue.....on that note any one know if obama care is gonna cover rehab?

There is another thread on this found here

More importantly tho, if only for home state pride, Prostitution is still legal in Nevada.

You would also be correct in assuming that this is about drawing in the youth vote, as well as the minority vote. I imagine the next election cycle will feature at least one candidate who will openly push the legalization agenda to pull in the numbers needed to win the White House.

Just gave the cartels a huge boost in business.

More people will be heading north of the border.

Way to go Holder ! ! ! !

Huff Post

If the administration is serious about using law enforcement resources in a smarter way, it should be a no-brainer to strongly direct federal prosecutors to respect the majority of voters by allowing these groundbreaking state laws to be implemented without interference," Marijuana Majority's Tom Angell said in a statement. "Clearly, drug policy reformers have a lot of work ahead of us ... but today's remarks give us a lot to work with."

There is also an interesting slide show at the bottom about "People more evolved on Marijuana than Obama."

And then there is this.
Big Billy Clinton on Marijuana

Illicit drugs are the third most valuable industry behind food and oil?
Breaking the Taboo

reply to post by WaterBottle


We need to keep an eye on the details...

Remember the Federal Government and the State Governments are separate sovereigns. Just because the Feds want to end mandatory minimums does not mean the same will apply at the state level.

This is a joke:

There are only two ways to avoid receiving a mandatory minimum sentence. First, the defendant may provide “substantial assistance” by turning in others. If the government is satisfied with the cooperation, it can ask the court to impose a sentence lower than the mandatory minimum. Second, some defendants qualify for the “safety valve,” a law Congress passed in 1994 (at FAMM’s urging) to provide relief from mandatory minimums. Click here to download FAMM's fact sheet on the safety valve

If the judge finds that the defendant is a low-level, nonviolent, first-time offender who did not use violence or possess a gun, and tells the government all about their crime, the defendant qualifies for the safety valve and must be sentenced without the mandatory minimum. The safety valve provides relief for nearly 23 percent of all drug defendants exposed to mandatory minimums. Although the safety valve is a step in the right direction, its eligibility criteria are narrow and thousands of nonviolent drug defendants cannot benefit from it.

www.famm.org...

This is about more than relieving 'overcrowded' prisons a lot more.

Why now? Why not when they first took over and had a chance to change the laws to reflect justice? Thousands of ruined lives. Lives that affect other lives when people have to turn to the government for handouts because their bread winner sits in jail over political BS.

Why now?


Peace

Originally posted by WaterBottle

Eric Holder: Many "Low-Level, Nonviolent Drug Offenders" Will No Longer Face Mandatory Minimums

www.buzzfeed.com

he Department of Justice is changing how it prosecutes thousands of drug offenders, Attorney General Eric Holder is expected to announce Monday.

The government will no longer pursue strict “mandatory minimums” for “low-level, nonviolent drug offenders who have no ties to large-scale organizations, gangs or cartels,” according to an advance copy of Holder’s remarks obtained by BuzzFeed. “By reserving the most severe penalties for serious, high-level or violent drug traffickers, we can better promote public safety, deterrence and rehabilitation, while making our expenditures smart

(visit the link for the full news article)

I believe there should be no prosecution for the use of marijuana. It's not in the same league with other drugs. So on that point yes, but on releasing criminals such as felons, no.

reply to post by neo96


Wait... what are you saying neo?

Damn!

Five years mandatory for a gram of acid!

Originally posted by onequestion
reply to post by neo96

 

Wait... what are you saying neo?

Look at those mandatory minimum possession amounts quite a bit right ?

Now people just get a slap on the wrist.

And go right back to business.

Of course there are political benefits to that as well but that deserve it's own topic.

Cartels will specifically target those people for their business transactions knowing nothing will be done.

reply to post by neo96



Yeah some of those amounts are ridiculous. I got you now. They are kind of criminal guidelines in a manner of speaking, kind of like what their willing to pursue or put up with.

This is a good development for the USA. Unfortunately Canada is going in the opposite direction.

A crime is only a crime if there is a victim. Who is the victim in a possession case?

reply to post by TheComte


The only victims in these cases are the defendants. Its ludicrous that we consider ourselves a free yet nation.

This is the United States of Corporation and Media